ICE’s have over a century of development behind them now. I’m not going to miss them, but I wonder if there’s a way to ‘archive’ this kind of specialist mechanical engineering knowledge. It may come in handy one day.
It’s depressing to read about engineers having to go to the Smithsonian to study the lunar lander to relearn some of the innovations and improvisations made at the time.
It seems inevitable that much of the practical knowledge is lost. Look at how few old sailing ships survive, despite that being the most advanced transportation technology for centuries. The schematics of the engines will survive, but future generations who study them will struggle to understand the design choices that went into them.
I’m happy that might change in the world of software, since so much collaboration is done online, and future historians will have troves of JIRA tickets to dig through.
> The schematics of the engines will survive, but future generations who study them will struggle to understand the design choices that went into them.
> I’m happy that might change in the world of software, since so much collaboration is done online, and future historians will have troves of JIRA tickets to dig through.
I doubt it. In my experience, JIRA tickets don't capture much information like that. Also, my employer at least has trouble maintaining actual design documents over the long term [1] that stuff that everyone views as transient has pretty much no chance.
Also, a lot of collaboration tools, while technically being more archiveable (e.g. slack, typical meeting recordings), are in practice so disorganized that they are rarely even useful as a long term reference for the teams that use them. Unless the team's software is truly world changing, I don't think any historians would bother.
Personally, I think the kinds of very formal processes that are unfashionable in the world of software are the ones that are most capable of capturing the reasoning behind design choices for future generations.
[1] stuff is spread across so many places, and a lot gets when we migrate from one enterprise collaboration system to another, or as teams reorganize.
A team of six or eight should have a dedicated scribe to link everything that is going on in one coherent whole. That role functions as the interface to the team and onboards new team member when people move on. A team without a scribe creates a new opening for that role for a noob to learn by doing.
One advantage ICE has over the historical preservation of sail is that cars as a collectors item are far easier to keep around, and much of the design artifacts will last much longer.
It's unlikely ICE cars will be banned from being driven in the next 30 years, if ever. Once electric is proliferated the effects of car enthusiasts will be negligible. Even if there are some bans, motorsport will hopefully continue.
Many car manufacturers run heritage parts programs and there is already a well established industry for maintaining the collector and enthusiast car fleet that has nothing to do with the new car cycle. People are engineering entirely new parts for old cars all the time, we won't be forgetting how ICE works for a while yet. Although the goal of all that engineering effort may shift from efficiency to efficacy in the form of motorsports parts.
I fully expect to have to keep barrels of E85 at my house so I can take my soon to be heritage vehicle to the track every now and then, but I don't see us forgetting how to engineer for combustion engines.
Will they? Most companies' internal systems are locked down and we'll suffer the same problem. Open source is the best way we have right now to preserve software knowledge.
I don’t remember the lunar lander, but I do recall reading how each rocket engine on the Saturn V was one of a kind, because the engineers had to assemble each one by hand, and each acted slightly differently. So there’s no way to reproduce a specific Saturn V engine now, but there also never was back when the Saturn V was still flying.
Genuine question: How is this different from a F1 engine where each piston head is crafted for each cylinder in the block? When you go high performance things that look like they're a commodity become one-of-a-kinds as you push them right to the limits.
Would we do any differently today? I think we gravitated towards smaller and more numerous engines (that are easier to construct to the same exact copies), but nobody since has built anything remotely as large as the Rocketdyne F1.
These days we have computational fluid dynamics. We can simulate many more things to make an easy to build design rather than making manual adjustments to each one.
There’s been little need for a liquid fuelled engine that large though due to advances in solid rockets in the US and Europe, and a focus away from super-heavy launch vehicles elsewhere.
You'd have to redesign it from scratch - it would be faster. Which is what happened with the SLS engine/launch vehicle.
Duplicating the F1 would involve technology and knowledge of individual engineers who are dead and corporations that no longer exist. The TACIT knowledge and technologies required to go with the blueprints died with them.
SpaceX pursues its business on a much larger and, most importantly, more regular schedule. In this case it is possible to standardize and mass produce many parts.
Technology knowledge is extremely ephemeral and easily lost once you stop using it because so much of it is "tacit knowledge" that is only preserved by active use and passed by mentorship/apprenticeship.
We've lost many technologies this way. In some cases like FOGBANK and the recent B2 bomber heat exchange system, there was enough incentive to reconstruct it from scratch at great cost. For most lost technologies, that incentive will never exist. If you are very, very lucky, some other country will maintain it by continuing to manufacture it.
This is a major reason why "bringing manufacturing back to the US" is so hard. We literally lack the technology/knowledge context as a society to do that most of the time. It's like pondering a semiconductor fab project in Chad or Sudan!
Otherwise it becomes like pyramids and monoliths that some "moderns" can't imagine came from anything other than space aliens! "They couldn't have made anything like that back then because we can't do it today."
Well yes and no. Sometimes you can bring the industry back, but with a newer generation of technology. High capital investment industries like manufacturing I think are particularly amenable to generational leapfrogging because the original capital investors are very tempted to keep operating old methods for the margin. This gives an opening for any entity willing to make a new capital investment.
This is essentially what China did to a lot of US manufacturing, as well as SpaceX to old line aerospace giants.
Never mind 40 years, F1 cars of even a couple years ago become impossible to run because just getting the engine started requires custom equipment and knowledge that often doesn't seem to be preserved year to year.
I think we have already "lost" similar amounts of knowledge when the mechanical typewriters went away. And the mechanical calculators (and mechanical clocks?).
Or have you recently looked through a book on vacuum tube circuit design? Even more modern transistor-based analog circuit design is going to fade somewhat, as more and more parts of devices are moved to digital circuits.
It is a little terrifying and sad to see how many incredible ideas, that took a lot of smart people to develop, are basically thrown away over time.
What purpose should such a repo serve? The most common ones are museums. Yes, they are not perfect, and it is easy to oversimplify and misinterpret what is presented there.
If you want to preserve it for survivors of civilisational collapse, then it has to be codified and simplified first. Well done, a civilization could jump tech levels much quicker than if they had had to bootstrap everything first.
I know what you mean, but at the same time that’s just how tacit knowledge works. How many times have you looked back at software you wrote 4+ years ago. There are lines of code in there that you can’t remember the reason for that look strange or out of place, but you have a vague sense that they do something important. The actual knowledge is gone and the only way to rediscover it is via re-working the problem.
If we stop making ICE cars then a lot of the tech around them will be lost, but chances are we won’t care a whole lot because electric cars will be better for most people in most ways, and ICE cars will live on as a historical curiosity.
> ICE’s have over a century of development behind them now. I’m not going to miss them
They will mostly disappear from cars, and (more slowly) even trucks, but they are still going to be around for a lot longer in other applications – backup generators, heavy construction and mining equipment, the military, locomotives, smaller aircraft, ships and boats, etc.
We may well start to lose some knowledge about how to design ICEs optimised for specific use cases, we aren't anywhere near forgetting how to design ICEs in the general case.
Yeah, it's always a real shame when that happens. We have the internet, now, at least, hopefully lots can and will be made available once ICE falls further out of favor.
I'd read recently something similar about Colt. Not only did they 'lose' their bluing formula, but apparently never documented much about their smithing process, as they had trouble hand fitting revolvers due to a knowledge gap.
At the front of my mind are aircraft piston engines, which haven't progressed much beyond the 60s. One notable exception are the Diamond Astro engines, which are based on mercedes blocks.
Seeing as mass scale ICE development is probably a deadend, hopefully the current state of engines will hold over until battery energy densities become viable for light aircraft (an extremely selfish desire, i admit).
Lack of civilian aviation development is a result of misguided regulation. "OMG stuff is dangerous, lets require expensive certification for even the most trivial things ... except for the dangerous stuff that is already in use right now" and then we end up with brand new 2021 Helicopters shipping with 70 year old Lycoming engines.
There are something like 1.4 billion vehicles in operation world wide and 80 million new vehicles are sold every year.
That is at most 17 years once new vehicle sales are effectively 100% electric which will probably happen around 2030. The value of used gas cars will deteriorate rapidly as the spare parts and repair networks disappear and electric vehicle costs become much cheaper pulling forward demand for the transition to electric.
You making a lot of assumptions that arent born out by current experience. Its not uncommon for 100 year old cars to be registered and driven on public roads today. I personally have registered “daily drivers” from the 1970s and 80s. I actually rebuilt my 1972 motorcycle using factory parts from the dealership. As cars get rare they tend to increase in value, which also increases the return on effort/money put in to them. The “last running ICE car” is going to be a prized gem in a collection, not scrap metal.
and when 90+ precent of the cars on the road are EV - where are you going to get gasoline? or think how much an oil change will cost when motor oil becomes a specialty item
> You making a lot of assumptions that arent born out by current experience
current experience assume easy access to gasoline and motor oil that has been true for 100 years - that will pass in time
I've been wondering if the cutoff is actually much earlier. Say 50% of cars on the road are EV, how many gas stations can continue to run profitably with 50% less customers? Even getting and refining the gas requires massive global supply chains to transport and refine, what happens when there's a 50% drop in customers? Do they lose their efficiencies of scale? Do prices rise substantially as this happens?
I suspect once we reach a certain thresholds it will create other push factors toward EV's and accelerate their adoption.
It is my understanding that refineries cannot change the percentage of gasoline that comes from a barrel of oil. If electric cars become as popular as ICE, either gasoline will be used in other things, or other oil distillates will become very expensive. Likely no more cheap air travel, propane, etc.
I expect we will hit a wall that will inhibit adoption.
I'm not a petrochemist, but I think reforming/cracking is an old technology which allows you to produce syngas and smaller alkanes (methane, propane etc).
Gas stations are an interesting case, because most of them make most of their money selling snacks and beer. The gas money largely goes to the oil company.
I believe this is right, but gas is still the main reason people stop there. If people aren't stopping to buy gas then they will not be making their impulse/convenience purchases and the gas station still loses their profits.
It's somewhat more complicated because many also function as convenience stores, but most convenience stores near me have already died so I doubt that would save them.
That will work for some, most notably the big ones on the side of highways, but I assumed most people would be charging at home, at least for city driving. The earliest adopters will also be the most wealthy that are more likely to have rooftop solar to leverage.
I have one, too. Not really as a daily driver, gas mileage just sucks. When the daily driver is about to be replaced one day, it will certainly be by an EV.
I think that the main issue will be maintenance of ICEs in the future. Like try to find a garage that is able to tube carburators these days. It will be a while until we reach that point so.
You can DIY mod carb engine to EFI using plethora of cheap user programmable ECU modules and oem/salvage yard parts, its almost Lego at this point in time with everything understood and tons of documentation in the open. Throttle body, MAF, Lambda sensor, one fuel injector, fuel pressure reg, fuel pump, crankshaft position sensor, ECU, laptop to program and tune the ECU, all in all <$500. As a bonus you get to delete distributor and convert to electronic ignition for free. There are even plug&play kits for early troublesome mechanical fuel injection systems in ~$600-1000 range https://kjetkillers.pl/en_US/c/EFI-Electronic-Fuel-Injection...
You dont need top of the line $1700 Haltech elite 2500 or Link G4X FuryX if you arent seriously racing.
Maybe one day! I also have the option to take the EFI from one of the following model years. I suck at electronics, and the wiring is already a royal mess (wasn't me so!).
Exactly why I brought up very early cars and my carb’d motorcycle. They go out of common use but dont disappear anymore than carriages or horses have. Fully urbanised and developed countries have them as a collection or passion project and do silly things like bodge or manufacture specialty parts and fuel blends while reading esoteric haynes manuals on carb tuning. Meanwhile they remain commonplace where it makes sense, small portable two strokes, aircraft, developing nations, etc.
The thought that civilization is going complete displace and lose hydrocarbon based engines and logistics in 17 years... Its optimistic I guess?
Well, you still get OEM parts for Zenith carbs from the 60s. So I guess there will always be a rest of ICE powered cars. I wouldn't mind using green fuel or gas. Which might be the way forward for classics, mainstream I honestly only see EVs and fuel cells in the developed world.
That would be true if the oldest cars are being removed from the pool, but that isn't how it works. Cars crash, some models wear out, some just have too little resale value to keep going, etc so they're removed from the pool earlier. Other cars are very desirable so they're get around much longer. It's not a perfect circular system.
I was talking about the proportion of the worldwide fleet, not proportion of new sales. Remember, not all vehicles are passenger cars. And not all vehicles always near electric infrastructure.
I don't know about that, consider other tech that got superseded by new methods. It only took a couple of decades for there to be no companies manufacturing CRT TVs any more.
My point is that there's a long tail of vehicles out there. Whether the fleet transition from ICE to EV is fast or slow, getting the long tail fully transitioned in a similar timeframe is implausible.
Heck, we haven't even transitioned 100.000% away from horses yet.
The word development. They won’t be developing ICE technology any further. It seems unlikely to me that they’d stop producing ICEs altogether, but I can see why they’d focus on developing electric technologies instead.
But they're still iterating on current ICE engines, which you could call development. And in that case they're still developing ICE technology. It sounds like the only thing they're claiming is they will not come up with completely new designs.
The old product will get big fixes and some minor performance improvements (basically maintenance mode), but all the real R&D is happening on the new product.
Yeah, this was exactly my train of thought. That and the fact that it'd be a different story/title if they had completely stopped producing ICE cars, not engine development. There are emissions targets they're still on the hook for.
The plans for the Euro 7 standard are “technically a huge challenge with at the same time little benefit for the environment”. “This places extreme restrictions on the internal combustion engine,” Duesmann said.
If the Euro 7 standard has little benefit for the environment, it should be stricter, because the cities are full of toxic gases.
They’re saying it has little benefit for the environment and yet they’ve stopped developing new ICEs in favour of electric. Seems like it’s working to me
No, they will still work on upgrading their current engines to Euro 7, but what Euro 7 is is not yet decided, and there are lots of suggestions for anti-cheat measures that I'm sure they don't like.
It's worth mentioning that the Euro 7 standard has not yet been formalised, however the proposal is that it will require CO of less than 0.3g/km (currently 1.0g/km) and NOx of less than 0.03g/km (currently 0.06g/km).
Presumably coincidental, but the YouTube algorithm popped this video on Audi building their electric motors for me on Monday. Amazing how much automation is possible - humans almost merely augmenting the process. https://youtu.be/Tp3rsjaUt58
A hundred years after EV's become commonplace, our descendants will learn about ICE in history class.
They will be told that their great great grandparents' generation dug holes thousands of feet deep in the desert and under the sea to extract the liquid fossilised remains of plants that lived on Earth hundreds of megaannums prior. They took these liquid fossils, refined them in factories, transported them all over the surface of the earth, and poured them one gallon at a time into machines that squirted precise amounts of the precious liquid into metal cylinders where the liquid was set alight to explode thousands of times per minute, in precise amounts calculated to release power to a series of mechanical levers, pulleys, and spinning rods which did for 4 wheels what horses had done in the even more distant past.
> They will be told that their great great grandparents' generation dug holes thousands of feet deep in the desert and under the sea to extract the liquid fossilised remains of plants that lived on Earth hundreds of megaannums prior
EVs are not going to eliminate the oil&gas industry. We still need it for aerospace, military, maritime, mining, construction, plastics, chemical feedstocks. Some of those use cases we may find alternatives for over the coming decades, but I reckon in 100 years the oil&gas industry will be still around. Very likely it will be smaller than it is now, but I very much doubt it will be gone completely.
I'm disappointed the history wont mention states that became very wealthy off their deposits, only a few became good stewards of that wealth and the rest just got more skyscrapers and sportscars. They had to import teachers, engineers, system admins and other workers from developing nations, contributing hugely to those economies. And the wars.
One thing you can be sure of is that the states that became wealthy from fossil fuels will write histories that proclaim the virtues of fossil fuels, and the wisdom of the courses they navigated, in peace and in war.
“If you imagine the 4,500-bilion-odd years of Earth's history compressed into a normal earthly day, then life begins very early, about 4 A.M., with the rise of the first simple, single-celled organisms, but then advances no further for the next sixteen hours. Not until almost 8:30 in the evening, with the day five-sixths over, has Earth anything to show the universe but a restless skin of microbes. Then, finally, the first sea plants appear, followed twenty minutes later by the first jellyfish and the enigmatic Ediacaran fauna first seen by Reginald Sprigg in Australia. At 9:04 P.M. trilobites swim onto the scene, followed more or less immediately by the shapely creatures of the Burgess Shale. Just before 10 P.M. plants begin to pop up on the land. Soon after, with less than two hours left in the day, the first land creatures follow.
Thanks to ten minutes or so of balmy weather, by 10:24 the Earth is covered in the great carboniferous forests whose residues give us all our coal, and the first winged insects are evident. Dinosaurs plod onto the scene just before 11 P.M. and hold sway for about three-quarters of an hour. At twenty-one minutes to midnight they vanish and the age of mammals begins. Humans emerge one minute and seventeen seconds before midnight. The whole of our recorded history, on this scale, would be no more than a few seconds, a single human lifetime barely an instant. Throughout this greatly speeded-up day continents slide about and bang together at a clip that seems positively reckless. Mountains rise and melt away, ocean basins come and go, ice sheets advance and withdraw. And throughout the whole, about three times every minute, somewhere on the planet there is a flash-bulb pop of light marking the impact of a Manson-sized meteor or one even larger. It's a wonder that anything at all can survive in such a pummeled and unsettled environment. In fact, not many things do for long.”
― Bill Bryson, A Short History of Nearly Everything
I don’t like those developments. I’m living in Kazakhstan which is huge and cold in winter. People are poor and average car age is 20 years (plenty of cars with 30+ age). Everything is just opposed to electric cars use-cases. And of course we’re too small to be able to manufacture our own engines.
I mean, you're right - electric vehicles are heavily subsidized. But it's not like it's a one way street where ICE cars have no (indirect, in this case) subsidies. The petro industry has its own share of funding and tax breaks, ranging from greenwashing and public imaging [0] to regular old tax breaks [1].
I'm an American software developer who lives near the headquarters of Microsoft. My car is 15 years old.
Cars just last a hell of a lot longer than they used to. Even if every Western manufacturer stopped making petrol cars, you could still buy them from Russia or China.
And everyone stopped making cars, well, it's not impossible to have a domestic auto industry. After all, Detroit started from nothing. If you didn't care at all about emissions or fuel economy, a large-displacement 2-stroke engine wouldn't be hard to make. Heck, in the future, it might be harder to get hydrocarbon fuels (either synthetic or ultradeep drilling, which really does require exotic technologies) than it would be to make engines.
They will still be produced for many years to come. Combustion engines are basically at the peak of their efficiency at this point, they are heavily dependent on computers and there is not much gain in developing it further.
Don't know if it's true or not, but saw a comment elsewhere that said Audi mostly uses engines designed by other VW groups. On the other hand VW is showing a heavy commitment to electric vehicle production.
When VW switched over to 4 cylinder turbo charged engines for emission and fuel standards they turned to Audi to do the development since they had a long history with turbo charging (Quattro).
Audi is a sub-brand of VW Group which owns 12 vehicle brands in total that share engines. I find it strange that an announcement like this would come from a sub-brand and not mention the other wider brands.
VW group until recently believed in progress through internal competition, and VW and Audi were the main drivers of this philosophy, but since few years ago VW group announced that they will stop with this and focus on common development across brands.
This was most likely done to minimize the automotive crisis impact that was anticipated even without Covid in sight.
Audi saying they will not be doing further development, basically doesn't say much in light of this change. Could be more of a marketing thing in the end, or maybe to put some pressure on EU regulations...
Generally VW is doing a poor job at transitioning to EV and "connected" vehicles (just take a look at some reviews of ID.4, or issues latest Golf model has) and they do need to put a bigger focus there.
I would assume that the Volkswage group cannot abandon development for some reasons:
1. They cover markets that will not be ready for EV in the near future.
2. They will need combution engines for trucks for the forseeable future. I do not think that the Diesel engine has really reached the full potential, yet.
3. While the share of combustion engines will go down significantly, it will not become zero. Having one centralized engine development division may be sufficient for the future.
I wonder if we'll ever see development in External Combustion Engines. They have the same instant torque as electric cars, and in their latest iterations were proven much more efficient than ICE.
Yeah, I was actually thinking of buying a corvette or other sports car. Because I figure it will be a collectible and worth more money than I pay for it down the line. As they stop making gas cars.
It’s depressing to read about engineers having to go to the Smithsonian to study the lunar lander to relearn some of the innovations and improvisations made at the time.